I mean... pairing infantry with vehicles should be done by all factions, I don't see why it should be an inherent advantage to an entire faction. I don't think rewarding players for basically playing the way that requires strategic/tactical thinking is the way to build a strategy game. Units should suck just enough that they can't operate on their own and require other units to be maximized to their potentially, and that shouldn't be a faction-based concept. Yeah, it's easier to combine volksgren and halftracks... but the power output you get for combining pgrens and halftracks is so much more just based on stats as well as build order availability. But that's the tradeoff, if you get more power for doing the same thing as another faction you risk losing more. But, I see your point on not necessarily having a cheap and early repair unit could lead to more unforgiving games. Then maybe a solution here isn't to fundamentally change the infantry structure of the entire faction but just make an early repair unit available, like repair from the shwimm or ketten for the entire faction.i refered to the faction as a whole benefiting more from infantry paired with vehicles, not just one doctrine of it.
So far its much easier to combine simple Volksgren and Halftracks/20 mm vehicles as it is to combine PE inf with vehicles. The fact that their core inf can repair vehicles doesnt really helps as it effectively takes out both, the vehicles and your main line inf out of combat. As WH its way easier to fall back with your vehicles, repair it with a cheap repair unit while your inf keeps fighting. In early stage (i know and you know that i start with standard res) i often cant get my vehicles repaired in time untill i get the thrid building up with its repair station upgrade.
And the combat stats of my main line inf and even the better infantry isnt better (actually worse) than that of new Volksgrens and WH grens while spending effectively more.
Yeah.... super advantageous... You know how many compalints people have about how brits get to take the center earlier than anyone else because they dont have to build plus theyre stronger than any starting unit? That is a good advantage.thats really special and that really helps the faction. Its like saying brits is special bc they have a 315 MP sapper squad. Wow, what an advantage.You mean like having a combat unit for a construction unit
So is having a pgren as your builder and combat squad. You are already ahead of the build order in getting a combat squad out versus US. You can actually contend with the brits sapper position rush with something durable enough to grenade and uproot that rushed position. If i can make a chess analogy, the first principle in a chess opening is to develop your pieces. Most chess openings start with moving out a pawn because it enables other strong units to move and position. I imagine that like building your first building. Brits and PE basically get a first move where they can skip that pawn movement and go straight for unleashing their bishop or knight because their pawns are essentially bishops/knights.
I'll tell you what is going on here though and why it doesn't feel like an advantage. At higher levels of play in both chess in BK, people start their openings with the mentality of "open to not lose". Low level players don't knwo what to do, medium level players play "to win ASAP' and do gimicky things like trying to rush certain positions and then risk it all doing so. High level players play to not lose, analyze the enemy position, and then start working on the strategic counter. In general, high level players negate almost ALL advantages no matter what faction because that's just what they are trying to do no matter how you balance it or make things unique. Your assessment sounds like you want more "win ASAP" viability but that isn't a good way to go. If a particular tactic becomes TOO viable and the only next step is to specifically counter it, then hat eventually turns into rock paper scissor like gameplay.
In high resources yes maybe, but not on standard. It barely gets impacted because of fuel cost constraints. This idea was actually brought by figree and i think has worked really well. Standard resource games had nearly no effect, but high resource games were balanced where US was hard rushing greyhounds while WM had to waste time going back to base to build their second building once they hit T2. On standard, the WM build order hasn't changed at ALL except for ONE exception.... and I tested it not too long ago against a player. It worked, I won, but I doubt it would stand up against a high level player. I wont reveal that secret build order though, it is really really doctrine specific and I'm sure i've posted a replay of it on here some time on an older beta version. You probably know it hawks.WH cant get vehicles out that fast perhaps, but they can get their vehicle building way quicker now as well. In order to get both, inf and vehicle building, they both pay about the same.Or tier 1 combat vehicles?
Waffen SS? Assault grens with MP44 upgrades? Assault pios right at T1? Those.... are REALLY strong units... I don't think I've lost a game in the beta where I've done a double assault pio opening.Their combat stats arent superior to that of Volksgrens and WH grens (which are actually better or just as good at least)Or non-doctrinal elite infantry?
which, as mentioned above, isnt much of an advantage in early mid stage bc you have to draw your combat inf out of combat. So for the duration of repair you end up having little left to fight with. But i mentioned it above.Or nearly all combat infantry being able to repair vehicles?
Yah.... that's the point... Others need doctrines, PE doesn't. That's an advantage because it means you don't have to commit down any specific path to gain access to stronger inf. That's a huge advantage from a long-term strategy planning perspective because your build order is so much more flexible. And one thing we've observed that is the STRONGEST impact for high level players is OP-ness comes not from unit stats but from build order flexibility.Well, even with some of them used you dont necessarily end up better than WH once. Cap rate for example wont bypass that of basic WH grens even when you upgraded the cap rate buff. The combat buff is good but Terror and def doc buffing their inf as well by doctrinal upgrades.Or an entire building dedicated to upgrading base infantry?
Yeah as you can see we are working on that for brits, they have it the worst.Which i actually hope for all factions to be less straight linear and more flexible in tecing. The last two buildings is not so much of a bonus i would say, depending on which doc you play. WH gets tanks and TD´s (stugs and JP IV) out of one and the same building. So you can say its a bit different as PE gets tanks and heavy tanks out of the same building while WH gets tanks and td´s out of one.Or a non-linear tier structure that allows effectively 2 choices of buildings for each tier?
First of all... WM infantry becoming as strong as PE inf is a really recent thing... I'd say around the k98 damage buff changes... Previously, the lower performing k98s made the durability, additional utility, and weapon upgrade potential of the infantry the differentiator, pgrens were superior because they just scaled up faster and had more use. But now that k98s are basically g43s, the difference is marginal. Which goes back to me saying why i do not think the garand buffs were a good thing, because now everyone wants everything else to be buffed to match the garands new power. If everything is buffed, nothing is buffed. Do you know what someone asked me recently? To buff the smgs because theyre useless against garands now. There is even a whole post dedicated to buffing the mp40.So the general feeling is that PE is still quite a mirror to WH on a a factional level and boths infantry combat strenght is at the same level with PE having pioneer capabilties added to their main inf which can be an advantage but also a disadvantage. Its a difference but non that would make me to decide playing PE. Choosing PE is mainly based on: 1. Do i need Mobile howitzers for a long arty battle? and 2. Luftwaffe forces and air strikes?
But no one chooses PE or WH bc their factional gameplay is so fundamentally different.
To say that no one chooses PE or WH bc their factional gameplay is so fundamentally different I think is complete false, especially based on replays i've seen. ESPECIALLY so in the live version now, not the beta. In the beta, no one is even playing because people only complain to brick walls instead of coming to discuss on the forum and trying the beta out. We've got a bunch of north american beta testers, south american beta testers, even west eurasia testers, pacific asia beta testers. We barely have any european testers, just complainers (some of them dont even play the game).